Indo-France Aero Engine Co-Development Program
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
UK or France? Cabinet waits for DRDO on combat aircraft engine
Realising the imperative to acquire expertise on engine technology, the government has decided to pursue this objective by pushing Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO) to join hands either with Britain’s Rolls-Royce or France’s Safran to co-develop aircraft engines in India.
“Engines are a constraining factor… a strategic decision has to be taken. Both Rolls-Royce and Safran are contenders for fifth-generation Advanced Medium Combat Aircraft. A Cabinet note will be prepared from the DRDO side and circulated,” an official told The Indian Express.
Both the companies have offered to collaborate with DRDO’s Bengaluru-based Gas Turbine Research Establishment lab and provide full ToT and IPR, the government official said. A Cabinet note will be floated for this soon and the process has been initiated by the DRDO, the official said.
As India works to bolster its domestic defence manufacturing capacity, delays in engine supplies by GE to the Tejas aircraft due to supply-side issues, have led to a realisation that engine technology is a big constraining factor for the Indian defence forces.
Amid efforts to develop aircraft engines indigenously, both Rolls-Royce and Safran have agreed to co-develop a new engine for AMCA, a twin-engine 5.5-generation stealth fighter.
This comes months after the Indian Navy issued a project sanction order for the design and development of a 6 MW-medium speed marine diesel engine with Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. The prototype diesel engine with indigenous content of over 50 per cent will be developed at a cost of Rs 270 crore with 70 per cent funding from the Centre.
The developed engines will be used for main propulsion and power generation on ships of the Indian Navy and the Indian Coast Guard. Most of the diesel engines of higher capacity were being imported from foreign equipment manufacturers so far.
“Very few Indian companies actually own engine technology. For aircraft, ships or even automobiles, we still don’t entirely own the engine technology. The engines are getting designed abroad. The Kirloskar project (marine engines) will start the process of achieving self-reliance in marine engine development in the country. We are keen to do the same in aircraft engines,” the official said.
The delays in delivery of the F404-IN20 engine by GE Aerospace to Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd for the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft Mk 1A fighter jet were attributed to problems faced by the American company in reviving its downstream supply chains, immediately after the Covid pandemic.
“The Tejas engine delays were caused by supply chain issues faced by the OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer GE Aerospace). There is a need to have greater control of the engine procurement. As was done in the case of marine engines (with Kirloskar), the idea is to develop a local supply base for aircraft engines and we will do everything to develop an ecosystem here,” the official said.
The RFI (request for information) has been issued by Aeronautical Development Agency (ADA) and preliminary rounds of discussion with prospective players have been held.
The new engine for the AMCA, with a thrust class of 110-130 kN, is crucial for the aircraft’s capabilities like supercruise and stealth optimisation. It is targeting a first flight by 2029-2030 and induction by 2035. Initial AMCA prototypes and the first production batch (Mk1) will use imported GE F414 engines. The more powerful locally-produced engines are being planned for the AMCA Mk2 variant.
Rolls-Royce’s proposal involves developing a range of high-thrust turbofan engines for potential use in transport and civilian aircraft while Safran’s proposal entails a prototype derived from its Rafale fighter’s M88 engine family. Safran, which has a base here, also proposes to leverage its offset obligations from the Rafale deal and potentially boost the indigenous Kaveri engine programme.
Alongside its AMCA push, the government is also examining proposals from Russia (Su-57) and the US (F-35) for procuring a batch of fifth generation aircraft as a short-term measure to meet the Indian Air Force’s immediate needs, particularly in light of Pakistan procuring J-10C and newer fifth-gen fighters from China.
The problems with the American offer for the Lockheed Martin-built aircraft include invasive end-use monitoring clauses and interoperability issues with India’s traditional French and Russian fleet that comprise Su-30MKIs, Rafales, Mirage 200s and the indigenous Tejas Mk1A.
There is also renewed focus on mid-air refuellers and Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems or AWACS, with RFIs being initiated by the Ministry of Defence for both these categories of equipment, officials said.
Will the prototype from the M-88 derivative be open to further upgradation for future projects beyond the 120 KN SAFRAN is planning on in a JV with GTRE for AMCA Mk-2 ? @Picdelamirand-oil
It is supposed to be a 110kn class engine ie actual delivered thrust will be in the region of 100-105kn that the engine has to prove. If it is based on the M88 core, it will likely won't bee more than that.
Just my hunch but they will call it acceptable at F414 delivered thrust range if it ever proceed. Not a single JV has seen much success except in missiles so no reason to believe suddenly a new strategic tech jv will be successful. Govt will drop few billions into another joomla which is their intention anyway.
Amca engine performance requirements has been upgraded to 120kn thrust.
I just hope the government finally sanction funds for necessary infrastructure required for jet engine development as per GTRE's proposal. Then even if this engine just delivers 105 kn. We will have necessary infrastructure and expertise to make new engines in the future on our own.
105 Kn was intended from a M88-4 (M88-3 = 9 tons) from the beginning.
Since a lot of improvements were made, with the result a M88 T-Rex with nearly 9Tons in the same weight and size of the current 7.5 tons one.
So it is not impossible that the M88-4 of the beginning will now be able do developp 15 to 20% more than the 105Kn of the beginning.
We want the engine 5 years later after signature, so there's time to design a new derivative of what's going on SCAF demo.
It seems less & less likely that there will be anything 'next-generation' about the new JV engine. Seems it'll just be an improved 4th/4+ gen powerplant roughly at the same level as F414-INS6 in terms of technology, except with a higher level of ToT & joint IP control.
This may have serious implications to the growth potential of AMCA in the future. It may never attain F-35 Block-4's level of capabilities even with the new engine. That means whatever stop-gap 5th gen we buy (if we buy one, that is) will have to be upgraded, and we'll have to increase its numbers to serve well past 2050. In other words, it may not be a 'stop-gap' at all.
The T-REX is only giving 9 tons (~88kN) probably for a reason. Yes, the M88 core can be scaled well above 100kN - but this likely comes at the cost of engine life. This trade-off might be fine for short-term applications like the FCAS demonstrator, but for AMCA this is to be the definitive engine. So lifecycle cost will be a major factor as well.
The very 1st step for engine program. Get an MoU done between HAL's engine division and GTRE.
How idiotic is it that all the know how received over the years for various engines lays unused with HAL while GTRE tried to reinvent everything.
The upcoming GE414 ToT will also be totally useless to us without such a cooperation.
How idiotic is it that all the know how received over the years for various engines lays unused with HAL while GTRE tried to reinvent everything.
The upcoming GE414 ToT will also be totally useless to us without such a cooperation.
Nobody is matching the f-35 simply because nobody else apart from the Americans can create an engine like the f-135. Not even the Chinese, Russians or Japanese have been able to create 190kN engine.
When we talk about the AMCA's JV engine, we're talking about an engine that would hopefully be ready by 2040, but likely even later.
Even then, in terms of thrust or electrical output it need not do what the F135 (even today, without the ECU upgrade) does, it needed to do only half as much - as we'd have two engines on AMCA as opposed to single-engine F-35. In terms of thrust, it's not a problem as AMCA is smaller than F-35 and will enjoy a better TWR.
But in terms of electrical output, even with very good generators hooked up, even 2 x of these JV engines may not provide the kind of output a single F135 does.
Yes, even that would be good enough to exceed the capabilities of China's current engines. But by 2040-2045? It's extremely likely that at the very least the Chinese will achieve pre-ECU F135 levels of output, if not close the gap with the West even more. The kind of investment they're doing is mind-boggling.
If India creates an atom bomb programme type focus on jet engines, we can 100% achieve it. But we wont.
Why do you think the JV engine wont even be 5th gen?
Making a nuke or rocket engine is relatively easier than designing modern jet engine. I am telling this not because of india had acheived both nuke & rocket, its really a technological barrier. Had UN didnt take a concrete steps, every tom dick and harry would have nuke by now, its the stingent monitoring by various agencies is preventing many from having nuke.
We should have a more aggressive program than nuke to get a successful jet engine.
If the Safran offer is indeed a variant derived from M88, then it won't be 5th gen. You can't derive a 5th gen engine from a 4th gen core in terms of pressure & bypass ratios and materials used in the hot section. The most it would be is a '4+ gen', kinda like the F414 EPE.
If one of the two primary contenders for the JV program is only offering a 4th gen core, why would the other offer anything that's significantly better? Extrapolating from that, most likely the RR offer would be derived from an EJ200 core.
I think you're right in most of your points, but don't you think that Joint venture with Rolls Royce in development of a new 5 th gen engine from scratch is having problems like 1) Political Roadblocks ( possibility of US intervention), 2) much more money investment in comparison to Safran JV, etc... ?
Perhaps, but as we can see even France is only offering 4th/improved 4th gen tech in the JV. So it just seems like a decision taken from a sound business perspective - nobody is gonna give away their best or even second-best tech.
The US itself is negotiating to give 80% ToT for a 4th gen powerplant (F414-INS6) that would start production in just a few years time. I doubt they'd have much issue with 100% ToT on a 4th/4+ gen core that would only be ready by ~2040. By that time both US & Europe would be flying 6th gen cores while 7th gen would be in development.
I'm not sure if we can talk about the specifics of cost yet.
Yeah... I agree with you... Perhaps, an improved 4th gen engine will be enough for us because our main adversary will continue to rely on their 3rd Gen + engines like WS15 till 2040s even in their 5th & so called 6th gen aircrafts... What we need is development of atleast 2 major Companies in aero engine segment who will not only absorb and manufacture on the basis of TOT from Engine JV with foreign OEM, but also they'll have a proper R&D infrastructure to further develop the absorbed systems... Personally I feel that we can't rely on GTRE, DRDO solely because of various reasons for example - lower efficiency, zero competitiveness, zero urge for Market driven effectiveness.